Beyond βIs Your SOC AI Ready?β Plan the Journey!
You read the βAI-ready SOC pillarsβ blog, but you still see a lot ofΒ this:

How do we doΒ better?
Letβs go through all 5 pillars aka readiness dimensions and see what we can actually do to make your SOC AI-ready.
#1 SOC Data Foundations
As I said before, this one is my absolute favorite and is at the center of most βAI in SOCβ (as you recall, I want AI in my SOC, but I dislike the βAI SOCβ concept) successes (if done well) and failures (if not done atΒ all).
Reminder: pillar #1 is βsecurity context and data are available and can be queried by machines (API, Model Context Protocol (MCP), etc) in a scalable and reliable manner.β Put simply, for the AI to work for you, it needs your data. As our friends say here, βContext engineering focuses on what information the AI has available. [β¦] For security operations, this distinction is critical. Get the context wrong, and even the most sophisticated model will arrive at inaccurate conclusions.β
Readiness check: Security context and data are available and can be queried by machines in a scalable and reliable manner. This is very easy to check, yet not easy to achieve for many types ofΒ data.
For example, βgive AI access to past incidentsβ is very easy in theory (βah, just give it old ticketsβ) yet often very hard in reality (βwhat tickets?β βarenβt some too sensitive?β, βwaitβ¦this ticket didnβt record what happened afterwards and it totally changed the outcomeβ, βwell, these tickets are in another systemβ, etc,Β etc)
Steps to getΒ ready:
- Conduct an βAPI or Dieβ data access audit to inventory critical data sources (telemetry and context) and stress-test their APIs (or other access methods) under load to ensure they can handle frequent queries from an AI agent. This is important enough to be a Part 3 blog after thisΒ oneβ¦
- Establish or refine unified, intentional data pipelines for the data you need. This may be your SIEM, this may be a separate security pipeline tool, this may be magick for all I careΒ β¦ but it needs to exist. I met people who use AI to parse human analyst screen videos to understand how humans access legacy data sources, and this is very cool, but perhaps not what you want inΒ prod.
- Revamp case management to force structured data entry (e.g., categorized root causes, tagged MITRE ATT&CK techniques) instead of relying on garbled unstructured text descriptions, which provides clean training data for future AI learning. And, yes, if you have to ask: modern gen AI can understand your garbled stream of consciousness ticket descriptionβ¦. but what it makes of it, you will neverΒ knowβ¦
Where you arrive: your AI component, AI-powered tool or AI agent can get the data it needs nearly every time. The cases where it cannot become visible, and obvious immediately.
#2 SOC Process Framework andΒ Maturity
Reminder: pillar #2 is βCommon SOC workflows do NOT rely on human-to-human communication are essential for AI success.β As somebody called it, you need βmachine-intelligible processes.β
Readiness check: SOC workflows are defined as machine-intelligible processes that can be queried programmatically, and explicit, structured handoff criteria are established for all Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) processes, clearly delineating what is handled by the agent versus the person. Examples for handoff to human may include high decision uncertainty, lack of context to make a call (see pillar #1), extra-sensitive systems,Β etc.
Common investigation and response workflows do not rely on ad-hoc, human-to-human communication or βtribal knowledge,β such knowledge is discovered and brought toΒ surface.
Steps to getΒ ready:
- Codify the βTribal Knowledgeβ into APIs: Stop burying your detection logic in dusty PDFs or inside the heads of your senior analysts. You must document workflows in a structured, machine-readable format that an AI can actually query. If your contextβββlike CMDB or asset inventoryβββisnβt accessible via API (BTW MCP is not magic!), your AI is essentially flyingΒ blind.
- Draw a Hard Line Between Agent and Human: Donβt let the AI βguessβ its level of authority. Explicitly delegate the high-volume drudgery (log summarization, initial enrichment, IP correlation) to the agent, while keeping high-stakes βkill switchesβ (like shutting down production servers) firmly in humanΒ hands.
- Implement a βGradingβ System for Continuous Learning: AI shouldnβt just execute tasks; it needs to go to school. Establish a feedback loop where humans actively βgradeβ the AIβs triage logic based on historical resolution data. This transforms the system from a static script into a living βrecipeβ that refines itself overΒ time.
- Target Processes for AI-Driven Automation: Stop trying to βAI all the things.β Identify specific investigation workflows that are candidates for automation and use your historical alert triage data as a training ground to ensure the agent actually learns what βgoodβ looksΒ like.
Where you arrive: The βtribal knowledgeβ that previously drove your SOC is recorded for machine-readable workflows. Explicit, structured handoff points are established for all Human-in-the-Loop processes, and the system uses human grading to continuously refine its logic and improve its βrecipeβ over time. This does not mean that everything is rigid; βVisio diagram or deathβ SOC should stay in the 1990s. Recorded and explicit beats rigid and unchanging.
#3 SOC Human Element andΒ Skills
Reminder: pillar #3 is βCultivating a culture of augmentation, redefining analyst roles, providing training for human-AI collaboration, and embracing a leadership mindset that accepts probabilistic outcomes.β You say βfluffy management crapβ? Well, I say βignore this and your SOC isΒ dead.β
Readiness check: Leaders have secured formal CISO sign-off on a quantified βAI Error Budget,β defining an acceptable, measured, probabilistic error rate for autonomously closed alerts (that is definitely not zero, BTW). The team is evolving to actively review, grade, and edit AI-generated logic and detection output.
Steps to getΒ ready:
- Implement the βAI Error Budgetβ: Stop pretending AI will be 100% accurate. You must secure formal CISO sign-off on a quantified βAI Error Budgetββββa predefined threshold for acceptable mistakes. If an agent automates 1,000 hours of labor but has a 5% error rate, the leadership needs to acknowledge that trade-off upfront. Itβs better to define βallowable failureβ now than to explain a hallucination during an incident post-mortem.
- Pivot from βRobot Workβ to Agent Shepherding: The traditional L1/L2 analyst role is effectively dead; long live the βAgent Supervisor.β Instead of manually sifting through logsβββwork that is essentially βrobot workβ anywayβββyour team must be trained to review, grade, and edit AI-generated logic. They are no longer just consumers of alerts; they are the βEditors-in-Chiefβ of the SOCβs intelligence.
- Rebuild the SOC Org Chart and RACI: Adding AI isnβt a βplug and playβ software update; itβs an organizational redesign. You need to redefine roles: Detection Engineers become AI Logic Editors, and analysts become Supervisors. Most importantly, your RACI must clearly answer the uncomfortable question: If the AI misses a breach, is the accountability with the person who trained the model or the person who supervised theΒ output?
Where you arrive: well, you arrive at a practical realization that you have βAI in SOCβ (and not AI SOC). The tools augment people (and in some cases, do the work end to end too). No pro- (βAI SOC means all humans can go homeβ) or contra-AI (βit makes mistakes and this means we cannot use itβ) craziesΒ nearby.
#4 Modern SOC Technology Stack
Reminder: pillar #4 is βModern SOC Technology Stack.β If your tools lack APIs, take them and go back to the 1990s from whence you came! Destroy your time machine when you arrive, donβt come back toΒ 2026!
Readiness check: The security stack is modern, fast (βno multi-hour data queriesβ) interoperable and supports new AI capabilities to integrate seamlessly, tools can communicate without a human acting as a manual bridge and can handle agentic AI requestΒ volumes.
Steps to getΒ ready:
- Mandate βDetection-as-Codeβ (DaC): This is no longer optional. To make your stack machine-readable, you must implement version control (Git), CI/CD pipelines, and automated testing for all detections. If your detection logic isnβt codified, your AI agent has nothing to interact with except a brittle GUIβββand that is a recipe forΒ failure.
- Find Your βInteroperability Ceilingβ via Stress Testing: Before you go live, simulate reality. Have an agent attempt to enrich 50 alerts simultaneously to see where the pipes burst. Does your SOAR tool hit a rate limit? Does your threat intel provider cut you off? You need to find the breaking point of your tech stackβs interoperability before an actual incident does it forΒ you.
- Decouple βNativeβ from βCustomβ Agents: Donβt reinvent the wheel, but donβt expect a vendorβs βnativeβ agent to understand your weird, proprietary legacy systems. Define a clear strategy: use native agents for standard tool-specific tasks, and reserve your engineering resources for custom agents designed to navigate your unique compliance requirements and internal βsecretΒ sauce.β
Where you arrive: this sounds like a perfect quote from Captain Obvious but you arrive at the SOC powered by tools that work with automation, and not with βhuman bridgeβ or βswivelΒ chair.β
#5 SOC Metrics and FeedbackΒ Loop
Reminder: pillar #5 is βYou are ready for AI if you can, after adding AI, answer the βwhat got better?β question. You need metrics and a feedback loop to getΒ better.β
Readiness check: Hard baseline metrics (MTTR, MTTD, false positive rates) are established before AI deployment, and the team has a way to quantify the value and improvements resulting from AI. When things get better, you will knowΒ it.
Steps to getΒ ready:
- Establish the βBeforeβ Baseline and Fix the Data Slop: You cannot claim victory if you donβt know where the goalposts were to begin with. Measure your current MTTR and MTTD rigorously before the first agent is deployed. Simultaneously, force your analysts to stop treating case notes like a private diary. Standardize on structured data entryβββcategorized root causes and MITRE tagsβββso the machine has βclean fuelβ to learn from rather than a collection of βfixed itβ or βclosedβ comments.
- Build an βAI Gymβ Using Your βGolden Setβ: Do not throw your agents into the deep end of live production traffic on day one. Curate a βGolden Setβ of your 50β100 most exemplary past incidentsβββthe ones with flawless notes, clean data, and correct conclusions. This serves as your benchmark; if the AI canβt solve these βsolvedβ problems correctly, it has no business touching your live environment.
- Adopt Agent-Specific KPIs for Performance Management: Traditional SOC metrics like βnumber of alerts closedβ are insufficient for an AI-augmented team. You need to track Agent Accuracy Rate, Agent Time Savings, and Agent Uptime as religiously as you track patch latency. If your agent is hallucinating 5% of its summaries, that needs to be a visible red flag on your dashboard, not a surprise you discover during an incident post-mortem.
- Close the Loop with Continuous Tuning: Ensure triage results arenβt just filed away to die in an archive. Establish a feedback loop where the results of both human and AI investigations are automatically routed back to tune the underlying detection rules. This transforms your SOC from a static βfilterβ into a learning system that evolves with everyΒ alert.
Where you arrive: you have a fact-based visual that shows your SOC becoming better in ways important to your mission after you add AI (in fact, you SOC will get better even before AI but after you do the prep-work from this document)
As a result, we can hopefully get to thisΒ instead:

The path to an AI-ready SOC isnβt paved with new tools; itβs paved with better data, cleaner processes, and a fundamental shift in how we think about human-machine collaboration. If you ignore these pillars, your AI journey will be a series of expensive lessons in why βmagicβ isnβt a strategy.
But if you get these right? You move from a SOC that is constantly drowning in alerts to a SOC that operates truly 10X effectiveness.

P.S. Anton, you said β10Xβ, so how does this relate to ASO and βengineering-ledβ D&R? I am glad you asked. The five pillars we outlined are not just steps for AI; they are the also steps on the road to ASO (see original 2021 paper which is still βthe futureβ forΒ many).
ASO is the vision for a 10X transformation of the SOC, driven by an adaptive, agile, and highly automated approach to threats. The focus on codified, machine-intelligible workflows, a modern stack supporting Detection-as-Code, and reskilling analysts as βAgent Supervisorsβ directly supports the core of engineering-led D&R. So focusing on these five readiness dimensions, you move from a traditional operations room (lots of βOβ for operations) to a scalable, engineering-centric D&R function (where βEβ for engineering dominates).
So, which pillar is your SOCβs current βweakest linkβ? Letβs discuss in the comments and onΒ socials!
Related blogs and podcasts:
- βSimple to Ask: Is Your SOC AI Ready? Not Simple to Answer!β (Part 1 to thisΒ blog)
- βModern SecOps: What an AI-ready SOC actually means with Anton Chuvakinβ video
- βA Brief Guide for Dealing with βHumanless SOCβ Idiotsβ (the classic!)
- βSOC is Not Dead Yet It May Be Reborn As Security Operations Center of Excellenceβ (oddly related!)
- EP236 Accelerated SIEM Journey: A SOC Leaderβs Playbook for Modernization andΒ AI
- EP242 The AI SOC: Is This The Automation Weβve Been WaitingΒ For?
- EP252 The Agentic SOC Reality: Governing AI Agents, Data Fidelity, and Measuring Success
- EP249 Data First: What Really Makes Your SOC βAIΒ Readyβ?
Beyond βIs Your SOC AI Ready?β Plan the Journey! was originally published in Anton on Security on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.















